Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2022 [2022/09/22 04:40] – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 76.78.225.170
+++ 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2022 [2022/10/29 16:05] (current) – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 76.78.225.92
@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ====== I.	How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?  ======
-This movie was devastatingly accurate to the horrors of enslavement and the sheer degradation of the middle passage on the human psyche. Think about it this way, while it was extremely gory, this depiction still wasn’t as horrific as the real deal was. Even rated R movies can only show but so much. The emotion that this film conveys is that of deepest sorrow and torment. Something that these people lived in their entire time during this incident, and even after returning home. I believe that this film is an outstanding source for historical accuracy regarding the depiction of enslavement. Some of the court room scenes, and other related points are dramatized, but to the best of my personal knowledge, the depiction of slavery was not. -Michaela Fontenot
+This movie was devastatingly accurate to the horrors of enslavement and the sheer degradation of the middle passage on the human psyche. Think about it this way, while it was extremely gory, this depiction still wasn’t as horrific as the real deal was. Even rated R movies can only show but so much. The emotion that this film conveys is that of deepest sorrow and torment. Something that these people lived in their entire time during this incident, and even after returning home. I believe that this film is an outstanding source for historical accuracy regarding the depiction of enslavement. Some of the court room scenes, and other related points are dramatized, but to the best of my personal knowledge, the depiction of enslavement practices were not exaggerated. -Michaela Fontenot
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 The film was able to get a decent amount the of history correct, which was more than I was expecting. Having the characters speak their accurate languages was a huge deal to me. It showed that they wanted to keep the story true and portray these people as accurately as possible. Which allowed for the film to be both entertaining and authentic. - Neonya Garner
+This film was fairly accurate as a secondary source. Like all other movies, if you were to use this as a source you would have to verify everything and back it up with other texts. Many times filmmakers will dramatize or "jazz" up scenes so that they will fit with their narrative. However, in this film, the story was already so heartwrenching. Scenes like the suicide of the boat were both real and heartbreaking, likewise, the scene where the character is going around the dock trying to find someone who will speak the language, is also surprisingly accurate. -Annika
 ====== II.	Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
@@ Line 62: / Line 64: @@
 Although I found the film more historically accurate than I anticipated, I still found that it showed the faults of 1990’s historical films just like the others we have discussed this semester. There are a few glaring inaccuracies that prove that although Spielberg created a somewhat historically accurate film, **he still painted the Americans in far too innocent a light. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the slaves because of an international law—it was not a stand against slavery as a whole. The white lawyers and politicians were still depicted as the saviors of the slaves, making them heroes in the film.** In addition, the character Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman) was completely fictional, and in fact no black man would have been allowed to be present in the courtroom at this time in history. The film was successful in not dramatizing the story to the extreme. However, it does fall into the trap of portraying the Americans as heroes and saviors, attempting to downplay the racism that was present. -Burke Steifman
 ====== V. The "So, what?" question	======
+This film is set apart from all others that we have seen so far. This film is a grim masterpiece, one that should be praised in depth for its depictions. This is one of the rare times where I will say that the film makers needed to be hold responsibility for their actions, and it is wonderful that they did. This topic is extremely important and something that isn’t always freely spoken about. This film has power, end statement. This was not a film for entertainment in what we consider it, I believe this film is a statement, and very important one at that.
+This story matters, and this movie portrayed it shockingly well. -Michaela Fontenot
@@ Line 80: / Line 86: @@
 Like all Hollywood films, Amistad did not hit every detail on the head. However, the amount of accuracies that were able to be put in the film made it all the more impactful. It is important for a history such as this one (lesser known) to be portrayed as correctly as possible, and I believe Stephen Spielberg was able to do that while still having an entertaining film. - Neonya Garner
+I think this film was able to vividly display the hardship of being a slave. At times the movie seemed very performative and dramatic, but for the most part, it was able to portray slaves in an authentic way we haven’t seen in other movies. The hurt, confusion, sadness, and anger were almost palpable. The film took an important topic and did not shy away from the brutality of it like some films would because it might make their audience uncomfortable. -Annika Sypher